Sex differences in the contexts of extreme jealousy

Research on sex differences in jealousy using continuous measures sometimes reveals that women report more intense jealousy than men in response to both sexual and emotional infidelity. Two studies tested whether these findings might have stemmed from sex differences in the interpretation of the upper anchor of the jealousy scales (e.g., “extremely jealous”). In Study 1, women and men offered different types of exemplars when describing situations in which they felt extremely jealous. A significantly greater proportion of women than men reported feeling extreme jealousy in the context of romantic relationships. Additional results demonstrated that women and men confuse the terms “jealousy” and “envy,” although this confusion cannot account for the sex differences in the contexts of extreme jealousy. Study 2 demonstrated that the sex difference in the intensity of reported jealousy disappears if the upper anchor of the scale is modified to include specific contextual information (e.g., “as jealous as you could feel in a romantic relationship”).     

Gender, socioeconomic status, age, and jealousy: emotional responses to infidelity in a national sample

The authors used a representative national sample (N = 777) to test the evolutionary hypothesis that men would be more bothered by sexual infidelity and women by emotional infidelity, the Jealousy as a Specific Innate Module (JSIM) effect. Our alternative conceptualization of jealousy suggests that there are distinct emotional components of jealousy that did not evolve differently by gender. The authors looked for effects of age, socioeconomic status (SES), and type of measure (continuous or dichotomous) on jealousy. The authors did not find age or SES effects. Forced-choice items provided support for our alternative view; both genders showed more anger and blame over sexual infidelity but more hurt feelings over emotional infidelity. Continuous measures indicated more emotional response to sexual than emotional infidelity among both genders.     

Evidence for conditional sex differences in emotional but not in sexual jealousy at the automatic level of cognitive processing

The two evolutionary psychological hypotheses that men react more jealous than women to sexual infidelity and women react more jealous than men to emotional infidelity are currently controversial because of apparently inconsistent results. We suggest that these inconsistencies can be resolved when the two hypotheses are evaluated separately and when the underlying cognitive processes are considered. We studied jealousy with forced‐choice decisions and emotion ratings in a general population sample of 284 adults aged 20–30 years using six infidelity dilemmas and recordings of reaction times. The sex difference for emotional jealousy existed for decisions under cognitive constraint, was also evident in the decision speed, increased for faster decisions, and was stronger for participants with lower education. No evidence for a sex difference in sexual jealousy was found. Our results support the view of a specific female sensitivity to emotional infidelity that canalizes the development of an adaptive sex difference in emotional jealousy conditional to the sociocultural environment. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A reproductive threat-based model of evolved sex differences in jealousy

Although heterosexual women and men consistently demonstrate sex differences in jealousy, these differences disappear among lesbians and gay men as well as among heterosexual women and men contemplating same-sex infidelities (infidelities in which the partner and rival are the same sex). Synthesizing these past findings, the present paper offers a reproductive threat-based model of evolved sex differences in jealousy that predicts that the sexes will differ only when the jealous perceivers' reproductive outcomes are differentially at risk. This model is supported by data from a web-based study in which lesbians, gay men, bisexual women and men, and heterosexual women and men responded to a hypothetical infidelity scenario with the sex of the rival randomly determined. After reading the scenario, participants indicated which type of infidelity (sexual versus emotional) would cause greater distress. Consistent with predictions, heterosexual women and men showed a sex difference when contemplating opposite-sex infidelities but not when contemplating same-sex infidelities, whereas lesbians and gay men showed no sex difference regardless of whether the infidelity was opposite-sex or same-sex.     

Psychophysiological responses to imagined infidelity: the specific innate modular view of jealousy reconsidered

Three studies measured psychophysiological reactivity (heart rate, blood pressure, and electrodermal activity) while participants imagined a mate's infidelity. The specific innate modular theory of gender differences in jealousy hypothesizes that men are upset by sexual infidelity and women are upset by emotional infidelity, because of having faced different adaptive challenges (cuckoldry and loss of a mate's resources, respectively). This view was not supported. In men, sexual-infidelity imagery elicited greater reactivity than emotional-infidelity imagery. But, sexual imagery elicited greater reactivity even when infidelity was not involved, suggesting that the differential reactivity may not specifically index greater jealousy. In two studies with reasonable power, women did not respond more strongly to emotional infidelity. Moreover, women with committed sexual relationship experience showed reactivity patterns similar to those of men. Hypothetical infidelity self-reports were unrelated to reactivity.     

Sex drive, attachment style, relationship status and previous infidelity as predictors of sex differences in romantic jealousy

Recent research examining sex differences in jealousy suggests that more men than women tend to be distressed by sexual infidelity, and that more women than men tend to be distressed by emotional infidelity. The primary explanation for these findings is that evolution has shaped men’s and women’s responses to enhance their chances of reproductive success. However, within-sex differences are also found in terms of relative level of distress at sexual or emotional infidelity. This study examined the effect of alternative variables, particularly those associated with attachment and sexual motivations, on both between- and within-sex differences in relative distress at sexual and emotional infidelity. A community sample of 437 adults provided data using a self-report questionnaire. The results showed that sex drive was a significant predictor of distress at jealousy for both men and women, while attachment avoidance and previously being the victim of a sexual infidelity were significant predictors for men only, and relationship status was a significant predictor for women only. Overall, these findings support the evolutionary model of jealousy, and suggest that sex-specific evolved psychological mechanisms underpinning jealousy are influenced by attachment and sexual motivations.     

Sex differences in jealousy: evolutionary mechanism or artifact of measurement?

Two studies are presented that challenge the evidentiary basis for the existence of evolved sex differences in jealousy. In opposition to the evolutionary view, Study I demonstrated that a sex difference in jealousy resulting from sexual versus emotional infidelity is observed only when judgments are recorded using a forced-choice response format. On all other measures, no sex differences were found; both men and women reported greater jealousy in response to sexual infidelity. A second study revealed that the sex difference on the forced-choice measure disappeared under conditions of cognitive constraint. These findings suggest that the sex difference used to support the evolutionary view of jealousy (e.g., D. M. Buss, R. Larsen, D. Westen, & J. Semmelroth, 1992; D. M. Buss et al., 1999) likely represents a measurement artifact resulting from a format-induced effortful decision strategy and not an automatic, sex-specific response shaped by evolution.     

Gender Differences,Infidelity, Dyadic Trust,and Jealousy among Married Turkish Individuals

In the present study, relationships among gender, emotional response to partner’s imagined infidelity (emotional and sexual infidelity), and dyadic trust (low and high levels of trust) were investigated as functions of married Turkish individuals’ jealousy types (cognitive, emotional, and behavioral). Five hundred thirty seven (276 women and 261 men) married individuals living in urban areas in Turkey participated in the study. Results of the Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) revealed significant main effects for gender, infidelity types, and dyadic trust. Particularly, married Turkish men in this study were found to be more emotionally jealous than women. Participants who responded to sexual infidelity as more upsetting had higher levels of emotional jealousy when compared to the participants who found emotional infidelity more upsetting. Moreover, participants with low dyadic trust for their partners were found to be high in their cognitive jealousy and behavioral jealousy reactions. Results are discussed in details with implications for future research and suggestions for mental health practitioners.     

Relationship between short-term sexual strategies and sexual jealousy

In a classic study, Buss, Larson, Westen, and Semmelroth reported that men were more distressed by the thought of a partner's sexual infidelity (sexual jealousy) and women were more distressed by the thought of a partner's emotional infidelity (emotional jealousy). Initially, Buss and his associates explained these results by suggesting that men are concerned about uncertainty of paternity, that is, the possibility of raising another man's child while believing the child is their own. However, later they explained the results in terms of men's preference for short-term sexual strategies. The purpose of this research was to test the explanation of short-term sexual strategies. Men and women subjects were instructed to imagine themselves in a relationship which was either short-term (primarily sexual) or long-term (involving commitment) and then respond to Buss's jealousy items. It was hypothesized that, when both men and women imagined a short-term relationship, they would be more threatened by a partner's sexual infidelity, and, when they imagined a long-term relationship, they would be more threatened by a partner's emotional infidelity. Support was found for this hypothesis.     

Jealousy,Gender, and Culture of Honor: A Study in Portugal and Brazil

The purpose of this study was to examine whether gender and culture of honor were associated with the type of infidelity (sexual or emotional) that affected our subjects more. Samples of 192 Portuguese university students (119 women and 73 men) and 415 Brazilian university students (214 men and 201 women) participated in this research. Participants responded to six dilemmas reflecting a type of infidelity (sexual or emotional), a gender scale, and a culture of honor scale. The results of both samples are compatible with the cultural theses about jealousy. Both men and women were more affected by emotional infidelity. In addition, it was found that the relationship between the sex of the participants and the type of infidelity that induced stress in them was affected by sociocultural variables, such as culture of honor, masculinity, and femininity. Some differences in the response patterns in the case of an infidelity, in both samples (Portuguese and Brazilian), are shown and discussed.     

Gender differences in rival characteristics that evoke jealousy in response to emotional versus sexual infidelity

Previous research has shown that in men jealousy is evoked more by a rival's status‐related characteristics than in women, whereas in women jealousy is evoked more by a rival's physical attractiveness than in men. The present study examined whether the occurrence of this gender difference depends upon the type of infidelity one's partner engages in, i.e., emotional or sexual infidelity, and whether these types of jealousy evoke different emotional responses. An experiment was conducted using hypothetical jealousy situations with a 2 (participant gender: male vs. female) × 2 (rival physical attractiveness: high vs. low) × 2 (rival dominance: high vs. low) × 2 (type of infidelity: sexual vs. emotional) mixed‐factor design. Jealousy evoked by emotional infidelity was primarily characterized by feelings of threat, and jealousy after sexual infidelity was primarily characterized by feelings of betrayal and anger. Following emotional infidelity, in men, a rival's dominance, and in women, a rival's physical attractiveness, evoked feelings of threat but not feelings of anger‐betrayal. In contrast, after sexual infidelity, in men, but not in women, a rival's physical attractiveness evoked feelings of betrayal‐anger but not anxiety or suspicion.     

Factors Associated with Jealousy Over Real and Imagined Infidelity: an Examination of the Social-Cognitive and Evolutionary Psychology Perspectives

Three hundred fifty-eight undergraduates completed anonymous questionnaires regarding jealousy over a mate's infidelity. More men than women predicted that sexual infidelity would be worse than emotional infidelity when given the forced-choice hypothetical measures used in previous work. When some of the implications of hypothetical infidelity were controlled, the gender difference disappeared. One hundred twenty-seven participants reported having actual experience with a mate's infidelity. The two genders did not differ in degree of focus on the sexual versus emotional aspects of a mate's real betrayal. Sexual jealousy was correlated with having a greater number of sexual relationships and, for men but not women, with placing higher importance on sex in dating relationships. The results are discussed from a social-cognitive perspective.     

Gender-typical responses to sexual and emotional infidelity as a function of mortality salience induced self-esteem striving

The authors propose that gender-differentiated patterns of jealousy in response to sexual and emotional infidelity are engendered by the differential impact of each event on self-esteem for men and women. Study 1 demonstrated that men derive relatively more self-esteem from their sex lives, whereas women's self-esteem is more contingent on romantic commitment. Based on terror management theory, it is predicted that if gender-differentiated responses to infidelity are motivated by gender-specific contingencies for self-esteem, they should be intensified following reminders of mortality. In Study 2, mortality salience (MS) increased distress in response to sexual infidelity for men and emotional infidelity for women. Study 3 demonstrated that following MS, men who place high value on sex in romantic relationships exhibited greater distress in response to sexual infidelity, but low-ex-value men's distress was attenuated. The authors discuss the implications for evolutionary and self-esteem-based accounts of jealousy as well as possible integration of these perspectives.     

Same‐sex infidelity in heterosexual romantic relationships: Investigating emotional,relational, and communicative responses

The present study explores emotional, relational, and communicative responses to different‐sex and same‐sex infidelity in heterosexual romantic relationships. Two‐hundred and eighty‐five men and women completed an online survey. Individuals were asked to read a scenario in which an imagined heterosexual partner engages in infidelity with a different‐sex or same‐sex person. Individuals were randomly assigned to one of these two conditions and then asked to complete several measures assessing their imagined emotions, communicative responses, and relational outcomes. Results revealed that both men and women experienced more negative emotional responses to different‐sex infidelity versus same‐sex infidelity. Additionally, men reported more sexual arousal in response to a woman's same‐sex infidelity versus different‐sex infidelity, while women's sexual arousal did not vary across conditions. Lastly, men's communicative responses to jealousy (CRJs) for same‐sex and different‐sex infidelity did not vary, though women reported that they were more likely to respond to same‐sex infidelity than different‐sex infidelity with denial, and more likely to respond to different‐sex than same‐sex infidelity with signs of possession. Several emotional responses to same‐sex infidelity were also found to predict various CRJs. These findings and the implications of the study are discussed.     

Culture and gender differences in romantic jealousy

Jealousy is an intense emotion that is experienced in the context of romantic relationships. Previous research reported gender differences in ratings of jealousy over a sexual versus emotional infidelity. This study explored culture and gender differences in jealousy using a mixed methods survey design. One hundred and forty-five undergraduates from the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo participated. The Horizontal and Vertical Individualism and Collectivism Scale, Self-Report Jealousy Scale, and a modified Emotional and Sexual Jealousy Scale were used for analyses. Two hierarchical multiple regression analyses revealed that gender was a better predictor than culture in jealousy ratings involving an emotional infidelity; but culture was a better predictor for jealousy ratings involving a sexual infidelity. t-Tests also revealed that those who experienced an infidelity in the past reported significantly higher jealousy ratings and that women reported significantly higher jealousy ratings in emotional but not in sexual infidelity than men. The qualitative results revealed four dominant themes related to participant’s causal attributions of jealousy: Infidelity, Expectations of Time and Commitment, Social Media and Self-Esteem. The authors suggest that future research focus on intersexual and intrasexual differences in jealousy, as well the role social media may play in relationship expectations.     

Emotional responses to sexual and emotional infidelity: constants and differences across genders, samples, and methods

In three studies (total N = 619), the authors tested an evolutionary hypothesis: Men are more bothered by sexual than emotional infidelity, whereas the reverse is true of women. More diverse samples (in age) and measures than is typical were used. In Study 1, the authors found across gender, sample, and method that sexual infidelity was associated with anger and blame, but emotional infidelity was associated with hurt feelings. The evolutionary effect was replicated with undergraduates but not with the nonstudent sample. In Study 2, narrative scenarios were used; it was found that nonstudent men and women were more hurt and upset by emotional infidelity but were made angrier by sexual infidelity. In Study 3, using Likert-type scales, scenarios, and a nonstudent sample, it was found that both genders were more upset, hurt, and angrier about sexual than emotional transgressions when rating one kind without hearing the opposite type. The implications for how emotional responses evolved are discussed.     

Emotional and sexual jealousy as a function of sex and sexual orientation in a Brazilian sample

The goal of the present study was to compare the relative distress of homosexual and heterosexual Brazilian men and women on scenarios in which they imagined their partners sexually or emotionally involved with another person, using a forced-choice paradigm and continuous measures. Participants were 68 heterosexual men, 72 heterosexual women, 42 homosexual men, and 35 homosexual women. On the forced-choice questions heterosexual men (39 on one question and 37 on the other) were more upset than their female counterparts (21 on one question and 15 on the other) by scenarios of sexual infidelity than those of emotional infidelity. On questions using continuous measures no significant difference was found between pleasurable sex and attachment scenarios for heterosexual women or heterosexual men. On the highly upsetting scenarios heterosexual men discriminated between flirting and both pleasurable sex and attachment scenarios, being less disturbed by the former. In contrast, heterosexual women were equally distressed by the three scenarios. Scores for the homosexual men and homosexual women fell in between those of the heterosexual men and heterosexual women and did not show a clear cut preference for the sexual infidelity or the emotional alternative on the forced-choice paradigm. However, on the continuous measures of jealousy homosexuals resembled heterosexuals of the opposite sex. There was no evidence that jealousy would be less intense among homosexuals although reproductive outcomes were not at risk.     

Gender differences in subjective distress to emotional and sexual infidelity: Evolutionary or logical inference explanation?

Men and women were asked to imagine a romantic partner being sexually unfaithful and/or emotionally unfaithful. Three hypotheses regarding gender differences in subjective distress to sexual and emotional infidelity, and in the inferences linking the infidelities were tested. The results indicated that more men than women were distressed by imagining a partner enjoying passionate sexual intercourse with another person, and more women than men were distressed by imagining a partner forming a deep emotional attachment to another person. Asking another group of women and men to imagine a partner committing both infidelities at the same time, and then to indicate which component of the combined infidelity was the most distressing, produced the same sexual asymmetries. The prediction that men will infer from a partner's sexual infidelity the co-occurrence of emotional infidelity and that women will infer from a partner’s emotional infidelity the co-occurrence of sexual infidelity was not supported. An evolutionary perspective, rather than an alternative analysis emphasizing the different inferences men and women draw from sex and love, provided a satisfactory explanation of the sexual asymmetries in the cues to jealousy.     

Gender differences in subjective distress to emotional and sexual infidelity: Evolutionary or logical inference explanation?

Men and women were asked to imagine a romantic partner being sexually unfaithful and/or emotionally unfaithful. Three hypotheses regarding gender differences in subjective distress to sexual and emotional infidelity, and in the inferences linking the infidelities were tested. The results indicated that more men than women were distressed by imagining a partner enjoying passionate sexual intercourse with another person, and more women than men were distressed by imagining a partner forming a deep emotional attachment to another person. Asking another group of women and men to imagine a partner committing both infidelities at the same time, and then to indicate which component of the combined infidelity was the most distressing, produced the same sexual asymmetries. The prediction that men will infer from a partner's sexual infidelity the co-occurrence of emotional infidelity and that women will infer from a partner’s emotional infidelity the co-occurrence of sexual infidelity was not supported. An evolutionary perspective, rather than an alternative analysis emphasizing the different inferences men and women draw from sex and love, provided a satisfactory explanation of the sexual asymmetries in the cues to jealousy.     

Exploring perceptions of online infidelity

This study examines the similarities, differences, and potential linkages between perceptions of online infidelity and traditional infidelity using a sample of 123 individuals in committed relationships. Respondents nominated both sexually and emotionally based behaviors as unfaithful and expressed greater distress in response to hypothetical emotional, as compared to sexual, online infidelity. Unlike traditional infidelity, men generally were not more upset by sexual online infidelity than were women. Both men and women believed that emotional and sexual online infidelities were likely to co‐occur. A face‐to‐face meeting was perceived to be more likely following emotional, as compared to sexual, online infidelity and men were viewed as more likely than women to engage in sexual intercourse, given a face‐to‐face meeting with the online contact.